R S RAJENDRAN Vs. ARAYEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant in both the appeals. On consideration of the submissions made and scrutiny of the materials available, this Court is of the view that no question of law much less substantial question of law is available for consideration by this Court.

(2.) As could be well seen from the available materials, these two appeals have arisen from the common judgment of the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karur made in A.S.Nos.80 and 81 of 2001, which arose from two original suits, namely, O.S.No.309 of 1997 filed by the appellant herein seeking for permanent injunction, and the other suit in O.S.No.793 of 1997 filed by the respondent in SA.No.1189 of 2002 for declaration and permanent injunction. The respondent in her suit in OS No.793 of 1997 came with a specific case stating that the suit vacant site, more fully described in the schedule of property, was a part of Vaikkal Poramboke in T.S.No.63 of Karur village and it belonged to the State; that the plaintiff encroached the suit vacant site in or about 1991 and put up a thatched shed thereon at her own costs; that 'B' memo notices were issued to her; that she has been paying penal assessment to the State all along; and that the appellant herein/defendant, who was permitted to be in part of the property, refused to vacate the suit property. Under the stated circumstances, there arose a necessity to file the suit.

(3.) Contrary to the above averments put forth by the plaintiff in OS No.793 of 1997, the appellant herein has filed a suit in O.S.No.309 of 1997, wherein he sought for a relief of permanent injunction stating that he encroached upon the suit property in the year 1982 itself; that he put up a thatched shed thereon; that he has been living there continuously, and hence his possession was lawful and was to be protected. Both sides were given sufficient opportunity by the trial court for adducing evidence both oral and documentary. The trial court, agreeing with the case of the respondents, decreed the suit in O.S.No.793 of 1997 filed by the respondent herein, while dismissed the suit in O.S.No.309 of 1997 filed by the appellant herein. Aggrieved appellant preferred the above appeals in AS Nos.80 and 81 of 2001, which were enquired by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karur and on enquiry, the lower appellate court confirmed the judgment of the trial court and dismissed both the appeals. Aggrieved over the same, the appellant has brought forth these two second appeals.